How can someone say this?

What do you think of Rosie after this comment?

  • She's an idiot! Get rid of her ABC

    Votes: 27 48.2%
  • She's just trying to get some attention, she really doesn't mean it.

    Votes: 3 5.4%
  • She needs to realize she's screwed up and commit suicide

    Votes: 11 19.6%
  • I think she is a waste of human flesh and really needs to stop using up our air.

    Votes: 29 51.8%
  • I'm just as screwed up as she is and agree with her

    Votes: 4 7.1%

  • Total voters
    56
  • Poll closed .
P

PelyKat

Guest
itsbob said:
Except the Orange and Green you speak of are religous based, not political like Rep, or Dem.. The colors represent the Protestant's and the Catholics..

Actually the "religion" is only because the countries had official religions. Then when the English invaded Ireland, they tried to make Ireland turn Protestant. Which was their biggest mistake. And their way of doing that was to give all the better jobs to those that converted, and leave the peon, trash hauler, muck-up type of jobs for the Catholic.

That is tha basis of the fighting. The religion is only a symbol of the sellout/English siding...economic reality of life there. If jobs had been based on ability, not religion..there would not have been any conflict.

As an Irish-Catholic, who spent a week getting the Insiders View from both sides. This is how I see it anyway. Did We American make mistakes supporting one side or another...you bet. Have things gotten better. Yeppers! Are people being promoted by ability, not religion...yep, slowly in some areas. But they are honestly trying. That's the important thing.

I'm not trying to argue. Just trying to let you know what I learned...and to show that with the proper motivation &education, even the English and Irish could work things out!

But then when you think about it...the "God" is the Same. Don't know how we'll ever work it out when the "Gods" are different.
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
bdh802 said:
"Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have separation of church and state," O'Donnell said. She had been saying that America was attacked "not by a nation." She continued: "And as a result of the attack and the killing of 3,000 innocent people, we invaded two countries and killed innocent people." Even her liberal co-hosts were shocked by her comments.

I think she's partly wrong and partly right. Radical Christians who push theocracy do pose a danger to democracy. But the radical Islamists are far, far more dangerous, and that can't be overstated. Although I'm disturbed when groups like Patrick Henry College talk about "an army for Christ," it should be emphasized that NONE of its graduates are flying jets into skyscrapers.
 
R

remaxrealtor

Guest
Mikeinsmd said:
She's a fat, fugly, loudmouthed, clueless blowhard. The only difference between her and Michael Moore is she has a penis.
I THINK I LOVE YOU!
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
How???

Tonio said:
Radical Christians who push theocracy do pose a danger to democracy.

There is ZERO physical or even social coercion to get anyone to go to a given church, act in the proscribed manner or adhere to the rules of a given religious road. We have free will and total religious freedom in the US. You can be, think and act in any way you want in this country as long as you are not violating someone else's rights. The only violating of rights that occurs in this country is whacked out Cartman types who think it infringes on THEIR rights if they're not allowed to be Pope just because they aren't Catholic.

UBL dictates, based on his beliefs, dress code, behavior code and religious code and that all of this supersedes every other facet of life; social, economic and educational.

Saddam just dug giant pits for those who weren't doing as he wishes.

We're not talking a matter of degree here. We're talking right and wrong. They have the right to be wrong in so far as it doesn't mess with us.
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
Larry Gude said:
There is ZERO physical or even social coercion to get anyone to go to a given church, act in the proscribed manner or adhere to the rules of a given religious road. We have free will and total religious freedom in the US. You can be, think and act in any way you want in this country as long as you are not violating someone else's rights.

Excellent point.

My point is that the radical Christians want to use public schools to push their religious beliefs on other people's kids. They want to do that through mandatory prayer and through the teaching of creationism in science classes. I see those measures as attempts to coerce.

You're exactly right that those measures aren't even close to the brutal theocratic insanity in countries like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistian. Still, I feel strongly about the school agenda I mentioned because that would impact my children.
 

Geek

New Member
Tonio said:
Excellent point.

My point is that the radical Christians want to use public schools to push their religious beliefs on other people's kids. They want to do that through mandatory prayer and through the teaching of creationism in science classes. I see those measures as attempts to coerce.

You're exactly right that those measures aren't even close to the brutal theocratic insanity in countries like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistian. Still, I feel strongly about the school agenda I mentioned because that would impact my children.


well said.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Tonio said:
My point is that the radical Christians want to use public schools to push their religious beliefs on other people's kids. They want to do that through mandatory prayer and through the teaching of creationism in science classes. I see those measures as attempts to coerce.
But the fact of the matter is that "radical" Christians aren't getting their way. There is no mandatory prayer in public schools, and it's unlikely there ever will be.

"Radical" liberals, on the other hand, are getting their way left (ha ha) and right. While no Christian has successfully lobbied to have students be required to bow their heads during a graduation prayer, liberals *have* successfully lobbied to have that prayer removed altogether.

No Christian has been able to have a law passed that says businesses or government institutions MUST have a Nativity at Christmas. But liberals *have* gotten laws passed that prohibits any kind of public religious expression.

So WHO is trying to prevent freedom of expression???

If you're going to fear something, I can think of a LOT scarier things than Christians.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Tonio said:
Radical Christians who push theocracy do pose a danger to democracy.
And, PS, Rosie's idea of a "radical Christian" is one who isn't in favor of gay marriage. Not quite the same thing as strapping a bomb on yourself and blowing up a grocery store full of Moms with their toddlers, now is it?
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
vraiblonde said:
So WHO is trying to prevent freedom of expression???

Valid points, but I don't see this as about freedom of expression. I see it as about evangelists wanting to get inside people's heads. As I see it, that is the goal of people who want to use schools to change kids' religious beliefs. As far as I can tell, the ACLU's motive seems to be much pettier - to keep themselves from being offended by expressions of faith.

As an FYI, fundamentalists in places like Kansas have been successful in having schools replace evolution with creationism. I don't recall them being successful in trying to bring back mandatory prayer.
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
vraiblonde said:
And, PS, Rosie's idea of a "radical Christian" is one who isn't in favor of gay marriage.

She's wrong. I've said before that everyone is entitled to their own opinions about homosexuality and gay marriage. And even people who want to ban gay marriage aren't necessarily radical Christians, either. As I see it, radical Christians are more likely to campaign for making homosexuality itself illegal, or to claim that all gays are part of a sinister conspiracy to destory the family.
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
Tonio said:
I think she's partly wrong and partly right. Radical Christians who push theocracy do pose a danger to democracy. But the radical Islamists are far, far more dangerous, and that can't be overstated. Although I'm disturbed when groups like Patrick Henry College talk about "an army for Christ," it should be emphasized that NONE of its graduates are flying jets into skyscrapers.
Radical Christians are only a nuisance to those that work in abortioin clinics..
 

LordStanley

I know nothing
Nucklesack said:
But (and dont paint me with a liberal brush please) the Liberals do have a point, with that argument. Since its been ruled, that the First (basically) says there is a seperation of Church and State. until that is challenged and overridden (hold your breath) by allowing government entities to have public displays of one particular religion or ANY religion doesnt that contradict the first?

The Supreme Court has the 10 commandments, but it also has other versions of other types of laws (does it not?)


Here is what the 1st amendment says
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


So where does it say a seperation of church and State. god that bugs me when people bring it up... sorry knuckle, Im not flaming you but just venting a peeve......
 
R

residentofcre

Guest
Now that I'm not a Candidate

Now that I'm not a candidate.... I can get involved in these religion and sexual preference discussions! [Like that stopped me before :lmao: ]


Rosie is a lesbian woman, in the public eye, adopting children. I am sure she got some pretty rough treatment.... and therefore sees the "radical" christian conservatives as an angry mob....

I for one think that her sexual preference has everything to do with adopting children [because of the dilemna the children see her dealing with].... but I am also happy that the children she does get are well cared for .... and that's a great thing....

Her comparison of the "radical" christian conservatives and the muslim extremist or the islam extremists is [in my opinion] still a far stretch....

Christian Conservatives are not know for blowing up buildings or flying planes into them. That said....

I am sure there are some [because I have run into them] that would equate the terrorism that we suffer today with the dirty deeds of the Church of England or the Martrydom of the first Christians... There are a lot of similarities.

The difference is fundamentally Love vs Points....The Christian faith teaches Faith and Love, were the Muslim or Islam teachings give points for irradicating the infadels.... such a grave state of affairs... what if a suicide bomber blows you up before you get the alotted number of points? The bomber goes to heaven and you didn't get your points so you go to haites... no wonder they are so willing to be suicide bombers...

We wouldn't be so much of a nation of infadels, to the Muslims or the Islamic nations, if we were more willing to be Christian Conservatives instead of choosing to be politically correct [as so many of us have been in Rosie's choices].

So... to sum it up.... by allowing someone in the public eye [as Rosie definitely is] to make the choices and remain in the public eye, we are opening ourselves up to judgement by the non-christians... but that is the "American Way" these days....

Rosie isn't sick... she's just public...
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Tonio said:
I see it as about evangelists wanting to get inside people's heads.

I'd rather have an evangelist inside my kids' heads than a Leftist.

As I see it, that is the goal of people who want to use schools to change kids' religious beliefs.

And it is the goal of the Leftists to change your kid's religious beliefs, as well. And they use their interpretation of the Constitution to do it, even if they have to stretch like Armstrong.

As far as I can tell, the ACLU's motive seems to be much pettier - to keep themselves from being offended by expressions of faith.

Exactly. They do not care how offended I get over soft porn on TV or cop killers being lauded in pop music, but they froth at the mouth over their "right" to never have to see a cross or hear a prayer. Who's getting their way - conservative me or liberal they?

As an FYI, fundamentalists in places like Kansas have been successful in having schools replace evolution with creationism.

Kansas has a right to their own values and what they want their children to learn. I could be wrong, but it seems to me this was put to a vote. And if it wasn't, we'll see come election time what the people of Kansas really think about this issue. People in Manhattan and LA should have nothing to say about what goes on in Kansas.
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
residentofcre said:
The difference is fundamentally Love vs Points....The Christian faith teaches Faith and Love, were the Muslim or Islam teachings give points for irradicating the infadels.

I could offer quotes from Deuteronomy where believers are ordered to kill family members that worship rival gods. I could describe the systematic harrassment of non-Christian cadets at the Air Force Academy.

But those don't mean that "faith and love" is all a deception when it comes to Christianity. It simply means, to me, that evangelism in ANY religion is contrary the idea of "faith and love."
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
vraiblonde said:
Kansas has a right to their own values and what they want their children to learn. I could be wrong, but it seems to me this was put to a vote. And if it wasn't, we'll see come election time what the people of Kansas really think about this issue. People in Manhattan and LA should have nothing to say about what goes on in Kansas.

Conservatives often talk about state government power versus federal government power on many issues, and I can appreciate that argument. But I see it differently. I see it as the individual versus government. Even if the majority of people in Kansas want a certain religion's doctrines to be taught in their public schools, it would be wrong for the schools to do that, because that would mean that students aren't allowed to have their own religious beliefs. Government has no authority in religious matters.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Tonio said:
Even if the majority of people in Kansas want a certain religion's doctrines to be taught in their public schools, it would be wrong for the schools to do that, because that would mean that students aren't allowed to have their own religious beliefs.
Students can learn about Christianity and still retain their own religious beliefs. Shoot, I know more about Christianity than most actual Christians do, and I still have my own beliefs.

Just because you learn about something doesn't mean you have to believe it. And anyway, it was my understanding that they were going to teach creationism in addition to evolution, not instead of. I don't see what the problem is, considering so many people in their world believe in creationism. It doesn't hurt you to know what other people believe.
 
Top